Kingdoms of Amalur's combat and character advancement are fantastic enough to overshadow how bland everything else is.

Even the greatest role-playing games aren't necessarily known for their great combat. They're frequently praised for their ambitious worlds, their involving stories, and the element of choice. But when you talk about your favorite RPGs, it's not often that the action is what you talk about first.

Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning is not like those games. In the future, when you talk about Kingdoms of Amalur, the first thing you will probably mention is how fun the battles were. Incredibly, this RPG's combat is so exciting, it could have been used in a pure action game and would have held up just fine. In fact, from a swordplay, loot, and leveling perspective, Kingdoms of Amalur is as good as any RPG in recent memory. This is the role-playing game you should be playing if excellent action and progression are your primary concern.

Of course, RPGs are about more than just swinging swords. The best of them aren't just games--they're worlds, in which unusual people mill about, inviting you into their homes and telling you of unimaginable treasures protected by unimaginable monsters. It's here that Kingdoms of Amalur falters. Amalur is nice enough to look at, and there are lots of things to do there. But each thing you do is pretty much like the last thing you did. In The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, you stumble upon a coven of cannibals and have telepathic conversations with a dog. In Mass Effect 2, you explore the painful past of a troubled young woman and witness the ultimate conflict between mother and daughter. In Kingdoms of Amalur, you kill stuff and listen to a bunch of nondescript characters spout line after line of unexceptional fantasy lore. There's so much talking, so much effort put into all this dialogue. And yet Amalur never develops an identity in spite of it all. There's a lot of tell, but not a whole lot of show.

There's at least a great premise providing a foundation for your adventure. You see, you are dead. Or at least, you were dead before a device called the Well of Souls brought you back to the land of the living. Upon reawakening, you find yourself in quite the position: you no longer have a fate. And because the laws of fate no longer apply to you, you can change destiny as you see fit. Save innocent lives. Kill your enemies. In conversation, act like a jerk--or like an angel. Like other RPGs, Kingdoms of Amalur occasionally grants you the power to choose. However, the story’s very premise nods to the fact that you are a blank slate, free to progress as you see fit. You're special in this world because everyone else is tied to the threads of fate. Before you came along, the future was unchangeable.

Swords are fun to swing, but if you get bored of them, it's easy to try something different.

It's a pity that Kingdoms of Amalur doesn't know what to do with the setup. You gradually learn more about your self-named, blank-slate character, but the game is more interested in getting you into battle than it is in developing its people. You can talk to the inhabitants about all sorts of things, but doing so is rarely more interesting than reading some dusty tome. It's nice to have a world fleshed out by conversations and books, but in any game, it's better to see and experience an adventure firsthand than it is to hear someone talking about one. There are some nice narrative touches that resonate, such as a conversation with a woman angry that the church has outlawed female clergy. But most dialogue is wooden description.

Many fine RPGs don't feature great central plots or superior dialogue, so the humdrum storytelling may not be a bother for you. It's too bad that the side quests don't pick up the slack. There's so little variety here. Kill spiders, find a missing person, collect these items, and so on. A few of these have a spark of creativity. You partake in a bizarre reenactment of an old legend, speak with a wolf cursed to roam as a human, and assist a dimwit who has been deceived by pranksters pretending to be something they're not. But overall, questing in Kingdoms of Amalur is a game of "chase the waypoint," in which you run toward quest goals without caring about why you're heading there. The dullness of questing is reinforced by your own voiceless character during cutscenes, who mutely stares into space during every conversation as if he or she has heard it all before.

Fighting monsters in one sunny meadow after another: It's the Kingdoms of Amalur way.

You may have heard Kingdoms of Amalur compared with The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, in the sense that they are both open-world fantasy RPGs. But such comparisons aren't really accurate. Amalur is "open-world" in a pedantic sense, yet it's not an enormous landmass, but rather a collection of big areas separated by winding corridors. (All you have to do is open the world map to see how different this game's world structure is from an Elder Scrolls game.) It's more akin to a large-scale Fable, with loading times and winding pathways used to segment explorable areas, dungeons, and towns.

The art design may also remind you of Fable (or maybe World of Warcraft), though Kingdoms of Amalur isn't so self-consciously lighthearted. It is certainly lovely, however, in a vanilla sort of way. Bright red and blue flowers dot sun-dappled meadows, where antelopes graze and hop about, prancing away when you draw too near. Crooked lampposts and skewed wooden rooftops welcome you to a desert village and its brown cobbled streets. It's all so pretty, pixie dust rising from enough grassy knolls and daisy patches that it looks like an army of fairies just exploded. But the visual design lacks identity, embracing the middle of the road and never reaching beyond. Kingdoms of Amalur doesn't have the exaggerated charm of Fable II or the rich detail of The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings. It happily embraces its pedestrian prettiness, like the front cover of any fantasy novel you might find on a bookstore's shelf.

It's that lack of identity that holds Kingdoms of Amalur back from being a force to be reckoned with. It feels like it was made by separate teams that did their own things without checking in with each other. The dialogue is all so serious, yet the art design doesn't complement that tone with an equally serious look. The creature designs are so wonderfully frivolous they seem like they belong in another game--though on their own, they are the best part of the game's visuals. Sure, you've got some ordinary wolves and spiders. But you've also got kooky boggarts that dance about like miniature witch doctors. Kobolds' ears are so pointed, they look as if they could carve up a roast, and big brutes called ettins are so engorged with muscles that it looks as if their sinewy tendons might rip through their skin at any moment.

Boy is it fun to fight these creatures! Kingdoms of Amalur's combat is fantastic, no doubt about it. Depending on how you equip yourself and how you spend skill points (more on this to come), you might find yourself heaving a long sword in addition to a pair of daggers, or sporting a bow and arrow along with some chakhrams. What are chakhrams, you may ask? Well, they are razor-edged hoops you fling at your enemies, which, like all of the game's weapons, may possess elemental properties to make them even more effective. Flinging a pair of fiery rings about is a blast. And as you level up, you earn moves that make you even more powerful, letting you string moves into combos that have you leaping out of harm's way as you fling the chakhrams forward, or releasing them in a single thrust that sends them circling around you like murderous whirling dervishes.

Chakhrams are by no means the only way to have fun in Kingdoms of Amalur. If you choose a great sword, you juggle enemies and perform combos that have you hurtling about like a champion pole-vaulter. With a late-game magic spell, you combine lightning, fire, and ice attacks in a slow-motion fit of elemental rage. With daggers equipped, you can sneak up on enemies and slit their throats from behind. Of course, there's more to good combat than all these fancy animations and combos. Without basics like proper collision detection or tight controls, the visual flourishes would be meaningless.

Thankfully, the combat is mechanically sound. When dagger meets flesh, you feel the impact. The occasional minor delay aside, the game responds to your button presses properly, allowing you to fire off arrows and spells without trouble. The auto-targeting (usually) chooses the proper target based on the direction you face, letting you move from enemy to enemy in a chain of slashes, stabs, and parries. The only trouble you might encounter is with the camera, which valiantly tries to make the action look cinematic. Every so often, however, it pulls in so close you can't properly manage the battle, or it might park itself underneath the ground geometry.

Another cave, another chance to find an awesome scepter.

You occasionally get the chance to enter reckoning mode and activate a melodramatic finishing kill that has you shoving a sword down an ogre's throat, or something equally vicious. (Hysterically, initiating a conversation while still in reckoning mode initiates a conversation with slow-motion lip synching but normal-paced voice-over.) But as satisfying as those fatalities are, the action's flexibility is even more so. You have two weapon slots and can equip anything you want in them, provided you meet the stat and level requirements. You can also spend points in any of three extensive skill trees, roughly divided into spellcaster, rogue, and warrior roles. Go full-on mage if you want, or mix and match as you see fit. Wield a sword and a magical staff. Try for the unlikely combination of scepter and hammer. Don't like how things are shaping up? Visit a fateweaver to reset your entire skill tree and redistribute your points in another way. Such are the benefits of freedom from the confines of fate.

With so much flexibility, looting becomes even more rewarding. Monsters drop a lot of stuff, and you find chests scattered everywhere. Because you could potentially change your approach at the drop of a hat, you might get use out of items that you would consider vendor trash in other games. Heck, you can break down some of that equipment and build your own weapons and armor using the blacksmithing skill. Vendors are there when you need them, but chances are that you can find or make items that are far more useful than what you can buy. You can even name your own creations, so feel free to use four-letter words in the name of your super special staff if you so desire. The game's ESRB rating is M, after all.

Other side activities include alchemy (experiment with herbs and make potions!) and sage crafting (make gems and slot them into your weapons and armor!), though that is hardly all of them. There's simply a lot of game here, and as uninventive as the quests are, there's comfort in going from location to location, engaging in awesome battles and unlocking chests to discover the spoils inside. (Side note: just because a lock is rated as difficult doesn't mean what's inside is all that valuable. It's disappointing to find a few herbs and minor trinkets that you might have found in an unlocked chest.) And there's no questioning how well Kingdoms of Amalur is put together. Bugs are rare, the combat is balanced well, and the frame rate is generally smooth. The only vermin you face are on the field of battle.

All that's missing is a pixie leaking glitter behind it.

How much you love Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning depends on what you look for in a role-playing game. Let's say you long for a pervasive sense of time and place, for a great story featuring memorable characters, or for varied quests given weight by superb context. If that's you, then Kingdoms of Amalur will disappoint. Then again, you might want wonderful battles against cool creatures, terrific looting and leveling, and lots of ways to customize your skills and equipment. If so, then this is the world you should inhabit. The context is hardly inspired, but you'll be having so much fun that you may not care.

Oh, boy, I might have played another game. I did enjoy levelling my character as I saw fit, but I liked so little else that I was rushing just to clear the main storyline (I can't just abandon a game).

I found it buggy (I had to give up quests cause completing them was impossible and the fast travel system stopped working mid-game). The absence of a lock-on feature, the camera, the unresponsive dodge, micro-managing spells (sometimes mid-combat -- four slots, really?), well, almost all of the elements of the game drove me up the wall.

Kindgoms of Amalur was a game a really wanted to like, really: such a promising start-off, great character advancement and beatiful animations. But it ended up as being just a game that annoyed me so much that it hurts just to remember.

This is a Very Good game that just can't turn the corner and advance to a Great Game like Skyrim could have been, if it wasn't broken. The graphics feel a bit out dated and "Vanilla". Game play/fighting is excellent. I would recommend. 8.0 out of 10.

amazing game almost everybody wont agree with this review and i never agree with kevin vanord e is a huge under rater reviewer i mean this game deserves a 9 i think it even deserves 9.5 the story is original in some aspects but what fantasy world wont be generic yet you dont say skyrim is or dragon age is the combat is the best and people play games for gameplay dont they? if not its just a movie great side quest like the one with the spiders that wants to terminate canneroc and you can either join the widow or kill her the world is beautiful though hey are some pop up sometimes intresting world too filled with diffrent factions all believe in something else hopefully the seual would be even better

Its weird how this game ended up being weakest in the story department. The story was written by R.A. Salvatore, who's written some pretty good stuff. The graphics and combat were truthfully better than skyrim but the story was just weak.

I bought both Skyrim and KoA and I swear I spend most of my Daytime hours playing these games. I believe everyone has the right to an opinion, but anyone who love like the kids say these day to be a hater, can eat a D*ck.

There is one negative thing I could say about this game, which to me would've bumped up the game's score immensely:
Not enough MOBS in the open world, you'd run for miles and find a small pack of familiar mobs, which takes away from the game's life.....A tip for the sequel 38 studios:
MAKE USE OF YOUR HUGE OPEN WORLD SETTING! If you've got the combat mechanics down so well, why don't you have the crowds of mobs out in the open for it?

"generic story/characters, world and quests" : I pity game reviewers bound to rush a game to publish the review, and thus missing the core of games ; the world is very deep, with knowledge about the races, factions, magic creatures, historical events ... in almost every quest and general knowledge/legends told by the monoliths ; thus most characters related to impportant events have personality, honestly even most of the secondary quest givers have personality, being voiced is a great plus as you understand the motivation to have the quest done ;
quests : of course they're generic, this genre hasn't known any "originality" in quests for 10 years! kill xx mobs, get a treasure, kill xxx to steal his sword ... why blame this game and not Dragon age, Oblivion, Sacred, Dungeon siege ... who didn't improve this "originality"??? And really here some of the quests are really interesting : the main quests and faction quests are a continuation of quests, but some secondary quests have different steps to complete too, and some let you decide how to resolve it.

I've played Skyrim for 20 hours, I've played KoA for no more than 5. so far I felt like I've done twice as much in KOA than I've done in Skyrim. Skyrim feels like a empty shell, a empty world to host a few interesting but still generic dungeons. KoA's world feels alive, very alive. the Towns aren't great true, the story isn't told well but it is a pretty good story. The battle system is top notch minus balancing(which is a huge, huge problem as it's very easy to become overpowered). Overall I would give it a 9.0-9.5 mostly due to balancing being the main problem. Sure Skyrim might of been more open, but is walking wherever you want with very little problems really right. I practically Jumped down a few mountains in Skyrim......
as for Story I was pretty excited when I encountered a wounded Fae, even more excited when I had the chance to become one of the great heroes in the house of Ballads. The story is there, it's not as strong as in some but it's quite there. Not to far in the main story but it's great so far.

Kevin were you trippin dude!!! I'm 10 hours inside the game mostly completing side quests and I can't get enough of this game. Giving this game 7.5 is injustice. I think Kevin has only played the demo of the game and has written this review on it.

Blahblahblah... graphics. Blahblahblah... generic (uhm what fantasy story isn't?). Blahblahblah... there are waypoints. All meaningless. This game is just plain fun.
If you love big huge worlds filled with trifling content play Skyrim. If you love gameplay, KoA is for you.

Why does everyone compare this game to Skyrim? Just because Ken is working on it does not make it an elder scrolls game.
I to me is more of a cross between Dragon Age and Champions of Norrath or Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance. This to me is a good thing. I love Skyrim CON and BGDA so I am happy. I say it deserves about an 8.5.

I think if they would have include voice acting in some of the cutscenes for your character instead of your character standing there with a blank expression of soulessness it would have been more engrossing. Just remember people this is their first attempt at an RPG and obviously they got a lot right so if they listen to the criticism and adjust accordingly the next installment could be amazing, but if no one buys/supports it unfortunately there wont be a follow up....

That thing about feeling with the characters and and living the world. I like that stuff alot. Too bad this game is weak on that. On the other hand the only games I've experienced having just that is foremost Heavenly Sword but also Red Dead Redemption. So, since that feeling is an exeptionally rare thing to accomplish, maybe one shoudn't hold it against this game so much.

Could we please stop the hating?IMO this review is accurate. When you review a game you have to account for the other similar games on the market to make a comparison or else every game would get a 10! Sure the graphics are beautiful but if the quests are boring and you just want to skip every dialogue that's not the kind of game I'm looking for. Just like Dragon Age 2(YES!!! a comparison) : in DA2 you just skip every animation and evey dialogue because the game don't make you feel anything for the characters nor the story. A game that makes you feel like skipping the story just fails at making you feel anything, fails at its immersion. When I play a game I want to feel as if I'm in the game, in the atmosphere, the ambiance, and if the story lacks, well, so does the game. And I don't seem how a hack and slash fest makes for an awesome game. Graphics aren't everything. Good review Kevin. stop the hate guys and justs wallow your pill. Everybody has their own opinion and there is no need to bash on someone. I suggest you open up your very own web site and start doing reviews with your real name and let's see how people will treat you. And what's the point on hating when you actually go on gamespot because you love its content? =) Peace

Kevin provided very articulate and clear reasoning for his scoring. Simply put, he places more emphasis on the world you wander around in than the combat. I'm the opposite - while I love skyrim, the combat is really clugy to me. There is no target lockon or sense of weight to the weapon impact. However, the world is engrossing. Conversely, Dark Souls had amazing combat but almost no back story or narrative AT ALL yet it scored a 9.5. My complaint with Gamestop isn't that KoA scored a 7.5 or Dark souls scored a 9.5, it's the inconsistency in scoring two games with the same strengths and weaknesses drastically different scores.

This is a great game. Combat is amazing. Pure freedom to fight however you choose without sacrificing magic for brute strength. World is beautiful and Skyrim has a marker showing you exactly where your objective is as well so I don't see the problem. I think it deserves at least an 8.5. Story telling is fine as well.

I am probably 15hrs invested in the game so far and I like it... is it the most amazing game Ive ever played no of course not. As mention a million times the combat is good and no its not a button masher that only works in the early hrs of the game. The art style is fablish but a little more edgy/dark. Some of the areas are quite diverse and really beautiful while others ummm bland (the caves mainly). I wont lie I really havent played much of the main story (mostly side quests) so I wont comment on it. I love that it has a fast travel right out of the box (as long as youve visited that location before hand). I do hate there is no jump feature its stupid I cant get over something that is knee high unless I walk around it. As far as all the comparisons goes I am glad this is not Skyrim, Oblivion, Fall Out or Mass Effect etc... I couldnt get into any of those they are overly complicated. Not that this is a dumb down version of those but it removes the fluff/crap ( I mean do I really need to be able to pick up a dinner plate and add it to my inventory when its utterly worthless). There is plenty to do in this game from blacksmithing you own weapons, making potions, to gem creation to enhance weapons and armor, tons of side quests, etc... so your not going to get bored thats for sure. If you into RPGs you might just want to check this out. Dont wait for it to go into the bargin bin remember this is their first attempt and its a damn good one at that so if their not supported

Spent about 6 or so hours with this game today and am enjoying it quite a bit. The story sucked me in more readily than that of Skyrim (to be fair, both are on the thin side) and the combat is definitely more fun and responsive. It's character creation isn't as deep as Skyrim's, but it works for this game. I haven't found this fantasy world any more generic than that of Skyrim, nor are the quests any more generic than those you find in most RPGs. Most quests in RPGs consist of go here, kill a monster, find some treasure, and etc. True, there's nothing outstanding here (at least so far) but it's well done and enjoyable to play. I'd say rent this if you're unsure. Give it a try. You may enjoy this.

Wow, I had no idea a new IP could inspire such rabid fanaticism! I'm not sure why all the complaints over the review.
Kevin is extremely clear about the negatives, even if you discount comparisons to existing games: the story is forgettable, the quests unvaried.
And he's clear about the positives: the combat is good enough it might stand alone in an action game, and looting is equally excellent.
His conclusion is similar to every other review I've read: how much you like this will depend on your prioritization of those aspects. And his score, if that's your basis for whining, is within 5% of the current median metacritic score. Seems clear, fair, and reasonable to me. Why the venom, people?

It looks alright, but I'll stick to Dark Souls. What threw me off is it looks like all you'll be doing in this game is following a waypoint to your goal, killing whats there through button mashing, then run back to the quest giver. I prefer a game that doesn't hold the players hand by explaining everything to the point that it makes the game a connect the dots kind of experience.

I've come to rely on vanord's reviews. i take everything he says quite seriously, especially when its regarding any RPG style of game. He is an FPS man at heart and thats what he looks for in a game, fast paced, instant gratification. i always keep this in mind for his reviews. he gave many games i really enjoyed lower ratings than this (white knight chronicles), what he dosent like in a game, i know i'll enjoy. thanks KVO, keep up the good work!

I think the review was spot on. It is because of the involvment of such heavyweights like R.A. Salvatore and McFarlane that the game must be held to a higher standard. We just know that they can do better. I don't read most D&D books (I am a big fan of D&D) because most of them are not all that great, but Salvatore's work is always a must read for me. McFarlane has done such terrific artwork with Spawn, that to see Amalur afterwards is disappointing. Celtic mythology is very interesting, and it is nice to see a different fantasy setting, but I can't help but think that he would have thrived much more if he was working on a dark fantasy setting.
Make no mistake, KOA:R is not a bad game, but it is not a great one, either. It is a good game, with most things done right, albeit unspectacularly, and a few failings sneaking in.

7,5 = good! Good means that he liked it! That its a good game!
What dont you understand about that!
The constant raging everytime a review is made on GS has to stop!
Jesus christ! Or else we could just have one score and thats 10.
Lets just say every game gets a 10 and then you dont have to rage every god darn time!!!
Stop!

I no longer put any stock in Gamespot reviews, thanks to this review. I shook my head when GS gave Skyrim a 9. Laughed out loud when they gave SWTOR an 8. Now they give this gem a lousy 7.5. Gamespot, you suck.

HAHAHAHAHAHA! SKyrim has a good story? -maybe somebody blind or something. The story in Skyrim'S not bad ....it's terrible..
The guy who runs around and shouts on dragons so he can kill them and then shout on some other dragons. And wow.Good written quests, In KoA i from the start got funny quests like Wolf who turned into man. In Skyrim. Well, all quests are the same. Go in XXXXDungeon and fetch something. And then it gots GOTY. Well poepl have no taste nowaday.

I normally don't respond to a Review but I had to login just to question how this Kevin VanOrd is allowed to review this game? If you have Skyrim with 9/10 score and the GOTY title, don't go trashing this incredible game the VERY SAME THINGS Skyrim is being praised for. If you are so biased and not playing the game with an open mind, why even bother doing reviews unless you intended to stick a bad score to the new competition of your favorite games. Have you even played past the first 45 minutes or are you basing your "professional" review on only the demo?

Agree with the comment from frankpoo. Docking it points for calling it generic is quite partial, it's still ok for a game to score 7.5 as I believe too many reviews are far too inflated these days, but do not require a game to be brand new in every way... if it's good, it's good.

Calling this game generic generic generic is well.......immature. Sure it may not be original but it's not like Skyrim (Your 9.0/10 GOTY Winner) is. This game deserves the same score as Skyrim IMO if all you are going to say is it's "generic". Next time actually review the product instead of just comparing it to other games. Disappointing Kevin

@godofwarbfcodfa I agree and disagree. I think the game deserves the score it got....or maybe an 8.3. The gameplay is FANTASTIC and the crafting system is so far my favorite in any game EVER. (Its so damn free and open :)). BUT! This is an RPG, ie game about the story. When ya get on down to it a good rpg is all about memorable characters, plot, etc. And while Amalur has a GREAT premise, it gets bland after a while. So as a hack and slash, it would get a 9. But as an rpg 8 is about all it gets.